Send me email updates about messages I've received on the site and the latest news from The CafeMom Team.
By signing up, you certify that you are female and accept the Terms of Service and have read the
Privacy Policy.

Study: Early Formal Schooling the Best

A
recent Canadian study, known as the Early Years Study, says that
earlier formal schooling could provide a better academic future for
children. As the third of its kind since 1999, data of the most recent
study continues to support the theory that lead author Dr. Fraser
Mustard (recently deceased) and his colleagues have outlined in each
recommendation; that children introduced to school earlier would
“maximize their development” with the help of early-childhood educators.
Their hope is that the provincial government will take note and adopt
their recommendations.

According to the authors, children that receive quality
early-childhood schooling perform better on yearly standardized tests.
These same children are also more likely to graduate high school and
attend post-secondary education. And since obtaining a job without an
education is difficult, the study suggests that overall quality of life
would be improved. “When people don’t graduate (from) high school, there
are really huge costs to the individual,” says McCuaig, one of the
study’s authors.

This “edge” on education is provided, McCuaig says, because children
are more prepared with the “social and emotional control needed in order
to focus and learn,” thanks to the early conditioning. But there are a
few issues that must be dealt with before early education can be
provided to all young children.

For one, early education teachers are working in other fields, not for lack of desire to teach, but for lack of pay. “

These people tend to be underpaid for the work they do,”
McCuaig told Postmedia News. “So the idea is that, when provinces
actually address early-childhood education in a concerted and systemic
way – with an influx of funding and well-planned child-centered
programming – people will go back to the early childhood education field
because that was their first love – they just couldn’t make a living at
it.”

Mothers of young children would also benefit from better childhood
programming. While twice as many children are currently attending
childcare programs, there are still many mothers that are unable to work
because of insufficient, costly childcare. Additionally, the 70 percent
of mothers that already work would be able to keep their jobs,
according to McCuaig.

“By organizing early-education to fit parents’ work
schedules, we double the benefits – kids who are doing better, a
better-supported workforce, and mothers who are able to get and keep
jobs,” she says.

More working mothers also means more benefits for the government.
Working mothers are less likely to need social benefits. And because
they are working, they will also pay federal taxes – taxes they wouldn’t
have paid while staying home. The extra tax funds would also help pay
for the extra educational funds needed to make the recommendations a
reality. Essentially, McCuaig says that the recommendation would benefit
everyone, and that the benefits greatly outweigh the costs.

You said it so much nicer then I would have HAHAHA! I agree 110% with you! I think they want to get the kids in the schools as early as possible, so that is the only thing they know, so they don't have the ability to remember life with out school & the cherry on the top for them is that the Moms will go to work & give them more tax money!

Quoting oredeb:

haha sounds like they wana put moms to work so they can put their kids in school early and get control over the kids, and more money for the government and make robots!! a good warning!

I think that this isn't necessarily about early formal education.... it is about money. Most of the people I know that used preschool have 1 stay at home parent that can be with the kids AND these families usually are financially secure.

This means that the kids have a parent that will study with them, tutor them and the kids aren't distracted by not knowing where to get their next meal. I wonder how home schooled kids compare with kids that went to preschool??? Don't we usually do better on those bogus tests anyway? ;-)

My main reason for making the decision to homeschool my 4 year old is that I did not want ABSOLUTE STRANGERS influencing him at such a young age. I am Christian mother and ANY compulsory education coming from public, private, charter, and/ or Christian institutions is dangerous. I would suggest reading books by John Holt and Raymond Moore. They have done research were children placed into school too early can cause the child to develop serious social and physcological issues...one of them being sociopathic tendencies parents tend to ignore. Many parents need to realize they cannot always know and/or see pyschic violence happening to their children until it is too late!

I sort of remember these kinds of studies swinging the other way with it just a few years ago-how waiting for the child to be 5 or 6 before putting them in school made a difference.

Honestly, I can't go to work outside the home with two children. Childcare would be insane, and I can't put the responsibility on a family member to watch them. I have to work from home. That on top of homeschooling is kind of hard...

I do worry that keeping my daughter out of school for this long might put her at a disadvantage (she is almost 5) though I think it is great she has developed her own way of thinking and being who she is w/o group approval, I worry about the transition to a group minded thinking.

There's been lots of studies on ece stating the benefits of ece. The main reason is the children know the basics before entering school.

I have my bs in early childhood education. What I got out of it wasnt putting moms to work but the importance of early education. It doesnt matter where they learn just that they learn in my opnion. Also look where the study was done in canada, which is pretty socialist, of course they want the children in the 'system'.

I have to take any write up about a scientific study with a grain of salt. There's not usually enough information for me to actually understand the study. For example, who were the children in this study and how many were in the study? What kind of background did they come from? Were differences in socio-economic situations and parenting taken into consideration? And, to whom were these children compared?

Also, some words and phrases are catchy, but the author never actually defines or explains them. For example: "maximize their development", "quality" (as in "quality early-childhood schooling"), and "benefit" (as in "the recommendation would benefit everyone"). The article may sound good on the first read through, but on closer inspection you find that it doesn't really tell you anything. Well, other than the fact that the author apparently believes that all mothers WANT to work outside the home and all children SHOULD go to school. Overall, I think it sounds like someone simply trying to support their own biased viewpoint.

Send me email updates about messages I've received on the site and the latest news from The CafeMom Team.
By signing up, you certify that you are female and accept the Terms of Service and have read the
Privacy Policy.